Everything Is Suspect When the Bible Tells the Story of John The Baptist.

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 28
Topic's author
#1
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
   From the conception of John until his death, everything is suspect and can be questioned.

I am always amazed that Christians will accept the first thing they are told about the conception, life and death of John the baptist  who , according to god Jesus was  " the greatest prophet that ever lived".Luke 7:28.

John's conception by a "barren woman"  Elizabeth , said to be Marry's cousin, is nothing new to anyone that has ever read the scriptures for themselves. It is a story that is repeated over and over and one has to wonder what it is that god has about "barren women"?  Because there are at least  five  other biblical women that are also said to be child baring barren women—
Isaac’s mother, Sarah (Gen. 11:30; 21:1-2) who had married Abraham
Jacob’s mother, Rebekah (Gen. 25:21) who had married Isaac.
Joseph’s mother, Rachel (Gen. 29:31; 30:22) who had married Jacob
Samson’s mother, who was unnamed (Judg. 13:1-3) and had married Manoah
Samuel’s mother, Hannah (1 Sam. 1:5-6, 20) who had married Elkana.

The questions surrounding John keep mounting up and they cannot be explained away without the theist invoking the supernatural .


If we put the recycled story of all of these "barren women" giving birth aside for now,  the first question that should be asked is :

considering that all first born were to be killed on orders Herod, Matthew 2:16(another recycled story) there is no mention of this priestly family fleeing anywhere to safety as did the Jesus family? 

Why no visit from an "angel" showing any concern for the safety of the first born of barren women chosen by god to be "greatest prophet that ever lived" and the forerunner to god Jesus himself?   Is all we know is that  "Zechariah went home"  after receiving the news and  performing temple duties, Luke 1: 23, and that for at least the last five months of her pregnancy Elizabeth, the  barren woman chosen by god to bare the greatest prophet simply remained in seclusion. Luke 1:24  And there in no mention of  the  "greatest prophets " birth either.   Not to mention, however did they escape Herod's sword without having to flee the country?


The Jesus family on the other hand were instructed by gods messenger ,for their own safety, to flee the country altogether and "escape" to Egypt  (of all places) Matthew 2:13.  

 "When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream.
"Get up," he said, "take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt.
Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him."

 





#2
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Stephen
According to church tradition, Elizibeth took John and ran to the wilderness. When Herod's troops came looking for John, they encountered Zachariah in the temple. Refusing to reveal the location of his son, they killed him.

John was said to have lived in the wilderness from that day.

We sing on the feast day of Zachariah,

"According to the Law of God you offered whole-burnt offerings in a sacred manner, wise Zachariah.
You became a luminary and a seer of the mysteries,
Bearing within yourself the signs of grace, all-wise one.
Slain by the sword in the temple of God, O prophet of Christ,
Intercede together with the Forerunner that our souls may be saved."

Topic's author
#3
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Mopac
According to church tradition, Elizibeth took John and ran to the wilderness. When Herod's troops came looking for John, they encountered Zachariah in the temple. Refusing to reveal the location of his son, they killed him.

John was said to have lived in the wilderness from that day.

 Nice. Now lets us see you evidence and then can you answer my questions. If not, you have had your say and you can leave the thread, can't you.



#4
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Stephen
This is what the church teaches. Probably the oldest account of this is in the proto-evangelian of James, which is not considered a part of the New Testament. Some of the accounts contained in this work are considered accurate by us, but we don't consider it to be scripture.

Topic's author
#5
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Mopac
This is what the church teaches............................................

So that's no evidence and no answerers either. I have to wonder why you even bother being here on this forum never mind on this thread?  Mopac.

Go away. 
#6
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Stephen
I'm not sorry that I cause you frustration Stephen.
#7
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
@Mopac
One wonders why you bother keep coming back to this site with your dilemmas. 

If you don't understand why the Scriptures seem to have certain "buzz words" throughout it, that is your loss.  The barren woman - who gives birth to life is an extremely beautiful picture of God' power.  Still, it has not finished either. I am surprised you did not bother looking to the book of Revelation where it again becomes part of the picture that God is portraying. 

Still - given that you attempt to read the Scriptures like a 21st century book with a 21st Century brain - this does not surprise me at all.  

Hi Mopac, that was an interesting piece of history that I had not heard before.  Thanks for that.  I am admitting my ignorance of it - although I know Stephen will delight in my ignorance to demonstrate how dumb I am.  

I, personally would have taken a different tack. But I have quite comfortable with that tradition - although I have not heard it before.  

I would have suggested that King Herod had ordered the deaths of all boys from two down in the specific region of Bethlehem as Matthew 2: 16 declares - and perhaps expanded the region out somewhat.  The two notions that occurred to me was that 1, either John the Baptist was over 2 and so not under threat. I think that Jesus was probably almost 2. Joseph and Mary were now living in a house - not in a stable - 2:11 and this gives us evidence to suggest it was some time after Jesus' birth.  Certainly, when the wise men were with the king - Jesus had already been born - and they still needed time to find the child and travel to Bethlehem.  

The second option and probably more plausible in my view is that John the Baptist's family did not live in the specific region of Bethelehem.  They were not of the line of David - so had no reason to be in that area - - although we are told it was in the hill country of Judah that they lived. Luke 1:39.  Yet it was not Bethlehem. 

Hence, why no angel came to protect John the Baptist is most likely - because he was not in danger - since he was over 2 or he was not in the specific area of Bethlehem where the soldiers of King Herod were sent.  

Either provide excellent reasons why God did not need to send an angel to protect John. 
Topic's author
#8
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret

One wonders why you bother keep coming back to this site with your dilemmas. 

 One has to wonder why YOU can never satisfactorily explain away these glaring anomalies .  Especially you, Reverend , with all of your years of study under all those learned orthodox scholars  and academic .  You did tell us that you :   "  do  understand Orthodoxy. I studied and was tutored byacademics, scholars, and priests and fathers from the OrthodoxChurch". #91

Yet you have never ben able to explain a single one of these biblical anomalies. 


The barren woman - who gives birth to life is an extremely beautiful picture of God' power. 
Irrelevant. It is a  rehashed story. And you keep assuming that "barren" only means unable to have children because of assumed old age. Well it doesn't. It can  also  mean too young to bare children and it can also simply mean  that the woman has no children - yet. 


beautiful picture of God' power. 
And see #1 above , I did predict the possibility of YOU  that you would  invoke the supernatural .  >>"  The questions surrounding John keep mounting up and they cannot be explained away without the theist invoking the supernatural ".

 


 no angel came to protect John the Baptist is most likely - because he was not in danger -

He was a first born!!!



since he was over 2 or he was not in the specific area of Bethlehem where the soldiers of King Herod were sent.  


Try as you may that won't work. Didn't a single one of those scholars and  academic teachers of orthodoxy tell you that John the baptist couldn't have been much older than six - eight months older than Jesus?  Mary & Elizabeth were pregnant at the same time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!;

Mary Visits Elizabeth 


Luke 1:36-41
36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child , and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. 37 For no word from God will ever fail.”
38 “I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” Then the angel left her.

39 At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40 where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth. 41 When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 

 OR ARE THE GOSPLES WRONG AGAIN!!!

Either provide excellent reasons why God did not need to send an angel to protect John - a first born and "greatest prophet that ever lived"  or simply admit that this is yet another biblical anomaly that cannot be explained, by even  YOU with all of your qualification, or anyone else for that matter. 

he was not in the specific area of Bethlehem where the soldiers of King Herod were sent.  

You don't know where he was. But let me just remind you again because you seem to have already forgotten that Mary visited Elizabeth "in the hill country of Judea" .  Bethlehem was in Judea.  read the verse , Reverend.

 

Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men.

lets try this one Reverend: 

Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men.




#9
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
You did not even read what I wrote. 

I quoted the verse in relation to the hill country.  Duh.  And I also said Jesus was almost 2 years of age when the Soldiers were sent to him and that John was over two.  I knew the difference in their ages and I accounted for it in my words above. The fact that you don't read my posts - reiterated why it is a waste of time communicating with you. 

Being first born is totally irrelevent.  You need to prove John was in danger because he was in the region of Bethlehem and was under 2. You can't do either of those things - back to the drawing board Stephen.  Let's see what piece of bogus material you will attempt to bring out next time. 

And by the way - when does John tell us Jesus was baptised? chapter and verse please.  

And where do I assume that a barren woman is an old woman? PLease link to the spot please?


Topic's author
#10
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
you don't read my posts 

Oh I do.  But you are ignoring that BIBLICAL fact that John wasn't much older than Jesus when Herod ordered the massacre of all children under the age of two. .  This is typical of theist/ YOU trying to rewrite scriptures. 


it is a waste of time communicating with you. 

Then don't.
I always make you look stupid anyway  if you don't embarrass yourself  before I get the chance to . You don't know your scriptures. You have proven that to be fact on many occasions now. And you have the brass balls to charge universities to lecture and tutor their students , now that is well worth a LOL!!!


  You need to prove John was in danger because he was in the region of Bethlehem and was under 2.

The bible does that. SEE ABOVE. Mary & Elizabeth were pregnant at the same time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. If Jesus was in danger then so was John "the greatest prophet", born just months before .. Your wriggling is simply creating more questions Reverend.  Herod had heard of the birth of Jesus. He then   ordered the massacre of  all boys two and under the age of 2.   >> 

Mary was told she was with child at the same time she is also  told :
Luke 1:36-41
36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child , and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. Do the maths, Reverend!!!!!!!!

AND
If John and Elizabeth  wasn't anywhere in the region then  YOU  have to explain why the Jesus family didn't simply retreat to where John and Elizabeth, Mary's cousin,  went to escape the sword of Herod,   instead of fleeing the country altogether travelling  4031miles, pregnant and  on a donkey to Egypt ?????    now off you go,




You can't do either of those things - back to the drawing board Stephen.

Stop being so fkn ignorant. I have shown you that the bible does show BOTH those things. Or is the bible wrong? 









#11
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
But you are ignoring that BIBLICAL fact that John wasn't much older than Jesus when Herod ordered the massacre of all children under the age of two. . 
Not true.  

If Jesus is almost 2 - say 1 year and 10 months - then John is over 2.  Not once have I ignored it. The whole point of me saying Jesus was almost 2 was to demonstrate that point. Your ignorance is astounding. Not only do you want to rewrite the bible - you want to rewrite what you think I said. 

You are one of the most deluded people I have met in a while.  You almost come to the closeness of Harikrish.  

And even in that particular point about John, because I gave two different reasons, that was not the primary one. The primary one was that John was not in the region of Bethlehem. Therefore his life was not in danger.  

You don't read very well. 
Topic's author
#12
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
But you are ignoring that BIBLICAL fact that John wasn't much older than Jesus when Herod ordered the massacre of all children under the age of two. . 
Not true.  

You are ignoring the bibles account of events. stop being so ridiculous. 


Mary was told she was with child at the same time she is also  told :
Luke 1:36-41
36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child , and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. Do the maths, Reverend!!!!!!!!

Why are you being so so ignorant of these facts.  This is  something only ethang 5 would insist on doing? 




You don't read very well. 
 THAT WILL BE YOU ETHANG5!

Mary was told she was with child at the same time she is also  told :
Luke 1:36-41
36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child , and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. Do the maths, Reverend!!!!!!!! THIS WOULD MAKE THE BAPTIST SIX MONTHS OLD AT THE TIME OF HERODS ORDERS MAX!!!!!!!!

 so why did god send an angle to the mother of the greatest prophet that ever lived and warn  her of the dire consequences that her SIX MONTH OLD baby was facing??

 Just admit it ETHANG5.   You don`t know, do you. 

#13
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
Why do you keep calling me Ethang? Have you completely lost your mind? 

I agree with the scriptures that Jesus is 3 months younger that John. I have never disagreed with this account. 

So if Jesus is almost 2 - at 1 and 7 months old - how old is John? He is over 2.  What is your problem?

IF the soldiers are out to kill everyone 2 and below - then John is over 2. 

The narrative tells us that Jesus was living in a house. Not in a stable with a manger. 

Time has passed on. I take the view as many people do - that the wise men appeared much later - potentially up to 2 years after his birth. There is nothing in the NT which disputes this.  The fact that Herod killed babies up to 2 years of age - supports this.  

John would have been well over 2.  And nothing in the NT disputes this -and I know this hurts your narrative - but I prefer the bible over you anyway. 

And since John was neither under 2 nor in the region of Bethlehem - there was no need for an angel to warn his parents.  the question you raised about Jesus going to live with John is an interesting one - but I suppose the prophecy in relation to Egypt would not have been fulfilled if that was the case.  And since the prophecy clearly needed to be fulfilled - then it was going to happen. 

Just dumb luck eh. 

For you anyway. LOLL@ Stephen's poor grasp of the NT and of OT prophecy. 
Topic's author
#14
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Why do you keep calling me Ethang? 

 I do!?   I am sorry.  It must be that you are achieving your own aspiration of reaching his level of ....communication  and wishing to " be more like him".  Or have you forgotten what you wished for.... and in writing , Reverend?  Here you go>>>

Tradesecret: "Ethang5 is a good friend of mine.  I have know him for a significant period of time. And if you think we are like each other, that is a huge compliment for me.  

If I could be more like him, I would" . #76 

I will be honest,  you  quite took me aback when you told the whole forum that,  seeing that only a day before,  the figure of all your aspirations was telling us that anyone killed by jihadist were " sheep"  ,  as if they asked to be and deserved to be slaughtered. #154.  Anyway, I hope that clears that up  for you. OR  didn't you write  post #76 Tradesecret? It has you name on it?


So if Jesus is almost 2 ...............................

 STOP IT!!!

 Jesus was just born when Herod ordered the death of children two and under.  John was six months old and putting them both in danger. There is no getting away from it. You simply do not know you fkn scriptures .  I have caught you cold  AGAIN!!!  dropping a great clanger and showing your own pure ignorance of these scriptures that YOU lecture and tutor university students on, yet know not the basic things of the life of Christ or the baptist John his "forerunner"  who, the scriptures also tell us ,  doubted  Jesus was the "messiah".. . 

Mary was told she was with child at the same time she is also  told :
Luke 1:36-41
36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child , and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. Do the maths, Reverend!!!!!!!!

Why didn't god send an angel  Elizabeth telling her that her  that her 6 MONTH old only son,  that would grow to be the greatest prophet that ever lived ,  was in imminent danger from Herod as he had done so for Jesus?





#15
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen

Tradesecret: "Ethang5 is a good friend of mine.  I have know him for a significant period of time. And if you think we are like each other, that is a huge compliment for me.  

If I could be more like him, I would" . #76 

I will be honest,  you  quite took me aback when you told the whole forum that,  seeing that only a day before,  the figure of all your aspirations was telling us that anyone killed by jihadist were " sheep"  ,  as if they asked to be and deserved to be slaughtered. #154.  Anyway, I hope that clears that up  for you. OR  didn't you write  post #76 Tradesecret? It has you name on it?
Yes, having not read anything you repeat about others - I hardly think it matters.  Ethang is one of the few posters on this site with any real integrity. You seem to spend a lot of time pouring over other people's posts in order to ridicule and mock them.  I don't listen to hearsay and I nor will I read your denigrations of others either. Unless I feel like it - which currently I don't.  

So if Jesus is almost 2 ...............................

 STOP IT!!!

 Jesus was just born when Herod ordered the death of children two and under.  John was six months old and putting them both in danger. There is no getting away from it. You simply do not know you fkn scriptures .  I have caught you cold  AGAIN!!!  dropping a great clanger and showing your own pure ignorance of these scriptures that YOU lecture and tutor university students on, yet know not the basic things of the life of Christ or the baptist John his "forerunner"  who, the scriptures also tell us ,  doubted  Jesus was the "messiah".. . 

Mary was told she was with child at the same time she is also  told :
Luke 1:36-41
36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child , and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. Do the maths, Reverend!!!!!!!!

Why didn't god send an angel  Elizabeth telling her that her  that her 6 MONTH old only son,  that would grow to be the greatest prophet that ever lived ,  was in imminent danger from Herod as he had done so for Jesus?

I don't particularly care what you think Stephen.  You have no evidence - no support to say that Jesus was only six months old at this time.  You simply don't.  Yes John was 6 months older than Jesus.  And when Jesus was baptised he was 30 and John was either 30 or 31.  

The narrative of Jesus' birth and his escape to Egypt is not required to take place in the same month, week, or even year.   The narrative puts it that the magi came from the East and said to Herod - where is the boy born king of the jews? I reckon it is quite possible that Jesus was born even before the Magi left the East. A trip of at least 3 months and probably longer. Since they would probably not have planned it until after the birth.  Then they went to Herod - how long did they stay there for? More than five minutes. Then they traveled to Bethlehem - how long? More than five minutes.  Then they looked for the baby who was no longer in the stable or the manger but now in a house.  Then they stayed there for how long? More than 5 minutes. He was the reason they came after all. Then they left and went home. How long after they left, did it take for Herod to realise that they were not coming back - more than 5 minutes.   How long before he organised for the solidiers to go Bethlehem region? How long before the soldiers go to Bethlehem? More than five minutes. How long did they spend with each child or family before they killed the children? How long did they spend in the region of Bethelehem before they were satisfied that they had killed all the children? 

The fact - yes fact - that Herod orders everyone 2 years and under to be killed - and not 6 months old - new born babies indicates strongly that Jesus was much older than six months and was probably close to 2 years of age.  You can chuck a hissy fit if you like - but you CANNOT refute this from the scriptures.  I gave two reasons for why John did not require an angel trying to save him - the first was that he was probably over 2 years of age and therefore not in danger.  Since you cannot prove how old Jesus was specifically - this reasoning is plausible.  There is not a thing in the NT that refutes this. Not one thing. And telling everyone that JEsus was six months younger that John does not refute it, since you don't know how old Jesus was specifically at the time.  What we do know is that it takes months to travel to Jerusalem from the East. What we do know is that Jesus' family had moved from the stable to a house. What we do know is that Herod ordered the killing of all children 2 years and under. Hence it is quite plausible that Herod believed Jesus was at least 2 years of age, unless you think he is even more of a murderous B than he was. 

I also said that although I though this was a plausible reason for John's safety, that I considered my second reason much more likely. And that Herod send the soldiers to the region of Bethlehem whereas John's family lived in the hills of Judea.  Two different places - and the latter - not within the region of Bethlehem - a sound reason to understand why John's safety was not in danger.   

You have simply wanted to believe that there was an inconsistency.  And yet, either of these two scenarios are plausible.  And nothing in the NT refutes this situation. 


#16
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
I am not sure why you are focusing on this one - when a much more alleged inconsistency is raised with Luke 2:39.

Does this happen before or after Jesus and his family flees to Egypt?

I have my own views - but surely this is one which much more clear as to inconsistency - moreseo than the other ones you have raised. 


Topic's author
#17
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
You seem to spend a lot of time pouring over other people's posts in order to ridicule and mock them. 
Victim hood. Now we are back to the real whining and whinging Reverend.

 Mock them?  No . Not at all.    Besides   -   "words are just words"  according to YOU and  "can't do anything".  And you still, haven't explained how it is that words can  "mock and humiliate"  people when they are "just words and can't do anything"?  But still you say my words that are only words, "mock and humiliate" you/people . HOW?

 I go over peoples comments especially on my own threads  for many reasons. But mocking and humiliating  certainly isn't one of them.  I think you can mock & humiliate and make yourself look silly enough without any help from me , Reverend. Just like you did here >>#8


Tradesecret wrote: So if Jesus is almost 2 ...............................

 STOP IT!!!

 Jesus was just born when Herod ordered the death of children two and under.  John was six months old and putting them both in danger. There is no getting away from it. You simply do not know you fkn scriptures .  I have caught you cold  AGAIN!!!  dropping a great clanger and showing your own pure ignorance of these scriptures that YOU lecture and tutor university students on, yet know not the basic things of the life of Christ or the baptist John his "forerunner"  who, the scriptures also tell us ,  doubted  Jesus was the "messiah".. . 

Mary was told she was with child at the same time she is also  told :
Luke 1:36-41
36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child , and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. Do the maths, Reverend!!!!!!!!

Why didn't god send an angel  Elizabeth telling her that her  that her 6 MONTH old only son,  that would grow to be the greatest prophet that ever lived ,  was in imminent danger from Herod as he had done so for Jesus?

I don't particularly care what you think Stephen.  

 I know. So now you can leave the thread .  You have made your denials and I have corrected you with your own scriptures.  Which categorically state that Jesus' mother  Mary and John the baptist mother Elizabeth were with child at the same time . But YOU,  with all of your qualifications and tutorage are refusing to accept what is written in the bible.  NO ONE IS SUPPRISED BY THAT! , I can tell you.



I am not sure why you are focusing on this one 

 That's none of your business, Reverend. But  there are a few reasons for me focusing on this and one is to watch the likes of you try explain it.
 And watching  YOU deny what the scriptures ACTAULLY do state is for me, a wonderous sight to behold.   


The narrative of Jesus' birth and his escape to Egypt is not required to take place in the same month, week, or even year.

You are again denying what the scripture actually says:

"After the wise men were gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up! Flee to Egypt with the child and his mother,” the angel said. “Stay there until I tell you to return, because Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.” So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt",<<<  Do you see that.? they left that same night. 

This was right after the wise men had departed they were told to flee and they did, NOT A  YEAR or two later.  So stop your nonsense, you are making yourself look silly AGAIN.

It wouldn't make any sense to risk the life of a new born king of the JEWS and  gods only begotten son, one more minute than was necessary, WOULD IT Reverend!???

Both baby boys were in danger from the time Herod issued is order. 


 You always seem to forget that when Jumped up people like you,  characterized by an attitude of qualified and learned superiority,  try and explain any of these scriptures your explanations will always raise more questions that you also cannot answer.. 


 

#18
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
Well you seem to ignore the word "child". It is a word for a small child but not a baby.  There are words for baby and even another for embryo. Another one for a bigger child than a toddler. This word - here is not baby. You just walk straight past it every time. 

You ignore the facts of the NT. John was not in danger.  You ASSUME John was in danger because he was six months older.  You ASSUME he was in danger because he was in the same country. YET the NT does not provide any evidence to support your reasoning. None whatsoever.   In fact it says nothing of the sort. It says John was a child. Not a baby. It says John was likely in the hills of Judea. It says Herod sent people to the region of Bethlehem. The hills of Judea are not the same region as the region of Bethlehem. Please address the facts. 

You then attempt to make this silence mean something which it does not.   Typical strawman. Invent something and then try and deny the truth.  

You have not corrected me. I referred to all of these things in my original post.  I linked you back several times to show that you cannot read. 

I have not denied any of the scriptures. I just refuse to read into them what is not there.  That is your MO. You read into it what is not there.  And you read into it when the NT is silent on it.  

You keep lying. Where does it say John was in danger? Where does it say he was in the region of Bethlehem? Where? Nowhere. 


#19
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Same old interpretation issues.

As written, but not as read.

And the short sighted soldiers were unable to spot the high speed donkey.....Whoooooooosh!.....It's just like a Road Runner cartoon, Wile E.


And barren is as barren does.....And all probably seduced and f**ked by the same smooth talking, vigorously bespermed,  wealthy wise man,  just passing through....Well that's my interpretation......I bet they thought that he was a GOD.
Topic's author
#20
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Well you seem to ignore the word "child". It is a word for a small child but not a baby..............................

 You are scrapping the barrel Reverend.  And ignoring the BIBLICAL facts.  Both these BABY boys, born withing SIX months of one another, were in danger.  And you cannot explain why one was not given a warning while another is told to escape the country altogether which they did in the middle of the night, and not "years" later as you are now trying to argue against the facts of the bible.

"After the wise men were gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up! Flee to Egypt with the child and his mother,” the angel said. “Stay there until I tell you to return, because Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.” So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt",<<<  Do you see that.? they left that same night.
#21
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@ethang5
@Stephen
@Tradesecret
***
Regarding the suggestion that Tradesecret and ethang5 are the same user, investigation already turned up negative results on this.

While it will always be possible two users are one, and are taking measures to evade detection, on any individual case it is highly unlikely. In this particular case, it is more unlikely due to no slip-ups in such measures for over two years. And frankly, putting that much time to maintain two such active identities would be scary.

The commonality between the users in question seems to primarily rest of favorite forum, and some shared phrasing. To use an analogy, not everyone who calls Trump an "orange menace" is the same person, even if they copy each other in utilizing that reference.

...

That said, making these allegations so public, seems to be a clear attempt to bait Ethang into violating a restraining order.

THAT WILL BE YOU ETHANG5!
...
Just admit it ETHANG5.   You don`t know, do you.
This is itself a violation of the restraining order, so the RO is being converted into a ban on Stephen (a new one may be put in place upon his return).

-Ragnar, DM
***
#22
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
Regarding the suggestion that Tradesecret and ethang5 are the same user, investigation already turned up negative results on this.
That anyone thought my usage was similar enough to Tradesecret to warrant an investigation is flattering. TS is a very good writer, and I wish the allegation aboutl similarity were more true.

29 days later

Topic's author
#23
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
To whom it may concern

Regarding the suggestion that Tradesecret and ethang5 are the same user,

 Sorry for the late reply.  Just to set the record straight.  I accused them of no such thing.  I have accused them of sharing a password. I did this weeks before my ban and oddly at the time no one complained.  I stand by that accusation and as I admitted at the time, I could never prove it. >>>> #78  Added12.23.20 05:39PM.




Topic's author
#24
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
I am admitting my ignorance of it - although I know Stephen will delight in my ignorance to demonstrate how dumb I am. 

 
Not at all, Reverend. I am though delighting  in the fact that you are admitting your ignorance for once instead of defaulting to your usual claim of  having  simply "forgot".
Very refreshing. Now keep it up.
#25
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
I accused them of no such thing.  I have accused them of sharing a password.
And how would you know this festus?

I did this weeks before my ban and oddly at the time no one complained.
No one takes you seriously.

I stand by that accusation and as I admitted at the time, I could never prove it. >>>> #78  Added12.23.20 05:39PM.
Then one wonders how you know, cause if you knew, you would be able to prove it. The only thing TS and I share in relation to you is the ability to toast you at will.

And the only thing suspect when the Bible tells the story of John, is your reading comprehension.
Topic's author
#26
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
@Barney
if anyone wants to be left alone by another member: The first couple steps are asking them to stop, and ceasing engagement yourself. #13  Ragnar

 Stay off my threads ethang5.  I don't want to engage you simply so you can bury my threads under your own brainless garbage.  You are far too incapable of holding any type of serious discussion on matters that you claim to believe in and convinced you to become a christian. .


#27
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Barney
Ragnar, looks like you're going to have to make the CoC clear, cause your @ box sure isn't going to be. 

I don't want to engage you...
Then stop @ing me you attention crazed hypocrite. 

598 days later

#28
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@ethang5
-> @Barney
Ragnar, looks like you're going to have to make the CoC clear, cause your @ box sure isn't going to be. 

I don't want to engage you...
Then stop @ing me you attention crazed hypocrite.
You are proving the title of this thread is effecting you.
Everything Is Suspect When the Bible Tells the Story of John The Baptist.